On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:50:09 +0100, Phil Archer <phil@philarcher.org>
wrote:
> Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Also, I definitely do not want to start having to implement support
>> for http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/stylesheet besides just
>> stylesheet. (Not for the Link HTTP header or for the HTML elements.)
>> That's just additional complexity for no gain and will only lead to
>> bugs and differences among browsers.
>
> There shouldn't be any need for UAs to resolve tokens given as values
> for @rel as absolute URIs and no one's suggesting that UAs should
> actually make an HTTP request of any kind to iana.org every time there's
> a link to a stylesheet. It's the person minting the new relationship
> type that needs to check. What it means is that if you create a link
> (HTML or HTTP) and use a @rel type 'foo' that gives a 404 from
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/foo then you really shouldn't
> expect UAs to do anything sensible with it.
>
> Whether a UA chooses to actually implement support for a registered @rel
> type remains very much up to the UA developer of course.
The concern is that besides supporting stylesheet (and it's case variants)
we'd also have to support
http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/stylesheet meaning the same
thing. And thus also http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/alternate
and the special behavior you get when both (stylesheet and alternate) are
specified. We can map http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/stylesheet
to stylesheet and such first, but I don't think adding another layer of
complexity is justified.
(I'm not at all concerned about UAs having to fetch such URIs, as any such
proposal would be stillborn.)
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>